Spanish language Q&A Forum

The lesson says, " This happens in one of these two situations. But, it appears from the examples and the quiz that aunque is followed by the preterite imperfect subjunctive only if both a) an action in the past and b) the information is shared by the speaker and the listener.

Why use estaba when saying “I was very calm and happy”? It didn’t seem like an ongoing action in the past but one defined by “after my swim”. Why not estuve?

The vocabulary and long sentences should make this type of story A2 or even higher. Eamples, bodegon to mean still life and lienzo. I wish there were some easier real A1 stories for me to start with. I either have to forget them or spend a lot time 

https://progress.lawlessspanish.com/my-languages/spanish/tests/take/4180465 This excercise is not translated to spanish

"Lo hago por ti" implies

"I do it for your sake, because of you and for you, altogether".

"Lo hago para ti"

suggests nothing about the true motivation,

which may well lay outside the addressee;

it only designates ti 'you' as the destination of the "doing". 

I have found this in:

"Delbecque - Towards a cognitive account of the use of the prepositions por and para in Spanish 1996".

This, I hope, might explain why 

"sacrificios por sus hijos"

is prefered to

"sacrificios para sus hijos".

In both cases hijos are the recipients, but the attitude toward the recipients seem to matter.

Google search gives 88,500 hits to "sacrificios por sus hijos"

and 39 to "sacrificios para sus hijos",

suggesting that "para" is a very poor (ungramatical?) choice here.

Hi,

I have read elsewhere that at least some, if not all, of these verbs can be conjugated as normal.  Although I am not sure of the circumstances.  Is this correct?

I have also seen a list of 100 verbs 'like' gustar.  Is this correct.

Gracias y saludos,

Colin

I was hoping to learn Mexican pronunciation  but you use the Spanish pronunciation using the th sound instead of c sound.  Are the listening exercises also going to use the vosotros  grammar forms or Mexican grammar?

Thank you Silvia,

In "La vida de Eva (B1)" gapfill test we have:

"Eva siempre ha sido una persona que nunca toma decisiones por dinero o por conveniencia. Su familia la quiere mucho y, para ser sinceros, ha hecho muchos sacrificios ______ sus hijos."

The hint for the gap is:

"she has made many sacrifices for her children."

the accepted answer is "por"; "para" is marked wrong.

The explanation given for this is:

"Lesson: Using por (not para) to express the originating cause or reason"

Could you please help me to see

why "for" is interpreted here as indicating the "cause" and not the "recipient"?

Thank you Silvia,

You write that  "for" in 

"she has made many sacrifices for her children"

implies a cause / an originating reason.

If so, why  "for" in 

"she has made many books for her children"

does not imply a cause?

Also, is the following ungrammatical:

"Ha hecho muchos sacrificios para sus hijos."